Mudcat Café message #3244371 The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #140399   Message #3244371
Posted By: MGM·Lion
25-Oct-11 - 04:50 AM
Thread Name: BS: Palestine
Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
-- to explain what is open State terrorism backed up by superpower bullying.--

Once again, Jim, please take the point that I do not disagree with you as to this point. I am trying to explain nothing - certainly nothing which, as in this instance, I deprecate as much as you do. I pointed this out to you before, with special ref to its beginning for me with those destroyed olive groves those years ago ~~ & YOU HAD THE GRACE THEN TO APOLOGISE FOR HAVING MISREPRESENTED MY POSITION, which you are now, here, back to doing..

Friends have suggested that the greatest contribution to anti-Semitism since WW2 has been the behaviour of the Israeli Governments and their supporters

Agreed. I repeat: I am no longer one of their supporters.

- the crouching behind the dead of Auschwitz that has gone on here has illustrated that fact perfectly.

I am not so crouching: simply averring a strong feeling that you are not paying their memory sufficient respect with some of your invidious comparisons and locutions ~~ hence my accusations of antisemitism, which I have already said above is probably as overstated as some of your assertions [tho, as to 'playing the race card', would point out that one can only play the cards one has been dealt!].

Try answering a few points Mike.

Well there you are: I think everything I have written above {none of them for the first time} is an answer to your points. If insufficient, then please specify which of your points I haven't answered & ~~ so long as not provocatively framed in terms which invite Eric'n'Ernie-dom ~~ I will do my best endeavours to address them.

Feel bound to add that your post about Nazi aims supported by pseudo-scientific research being exactly comparable to Israeli ones, which you rejected by asserting that you bloody-well hadn't meant that, & accused me of insulting your intelligence by thinking you had, still strikes me, as expressed, as susceptible to no other interpretation. Perhaps you would address that point with some more convincing arguments than a mere "bloody well", which really didn't cover the case at all.